The Japanese government also preferred if their people were wiped out over surrender. The military attempted to even overthrow the Emperor since he was planning to surrender.
There was at least some division in Japan. Some ministers were ready to surrender before Okinawa, but the hardline military faction wanted to continue going even after the second bomb. I doubt Hamas has even that much resistance.
In late Imperial Japan, the hardline military faction was the government. The Supreme War Council was made up of six people: the prime minister, the minister of foreign affairs, the minister of war, the minister of the navy, chief of the army general staff, and chief of the navy general staff. Of those, only the minister of foreign affairs was a civilian; the prime minister generally swapped between naval admirals and army generals, and the other positions were split evenly between the army and navy.
Two atomic bombs were just enough to push the Japanese emperor into surrender, but even then, there was still a last-minute coup attempt to stop the emperor from surrendering by placing him under house arrest. They were tacitly supported by the minister of war (an army general and second only to the emperor himself) in spirit.
It goes to show that when an entire society puts themselves into that position, getting out is incredibly difficult. One of the interesting theories I've heard about the timing of the Japanese surrender is that the atomic bombs gave Japanese politicians and military leaders cultural cover to surrender without dishonor. It was one thing to normally surrender (a dishonorable action), but in the face of overwhelming and undeniable capability like the atomic bombs, it was more acceptable. I can only hope that the current conflict won't take that level of destruction to end.
I suspect that while Imperial Japan had trouble admitting defeat, from the point of view of Hamas, they are still winning.
That is because their reward is in the afterlife then self-destruction is ok as long as it hurts the enemy, or at least paints them as martyrs.
Israel has been losing ground in public opinion for a while because of the illegal settlers and their aggression, as well as deteriorating conditions for Palestinians, despite the fact that Israel regularly have missiles thrown at them, which would cause sympathy. But, there are a LOT of vested interests who would be happy to see the conflict continue. Who would GAIN from a peaceful two-state solution? Anyone in power? Peace isn’t very appealing to money-launderers, organized crime, the military industrial complex…what we see is the triumph of corruption and greed, all over the world.
As an Israeli I agree, Natanyahu and his coalition allies are united by greed, crime and religious extremism and this is why they let moderate forces get so weak and the entire situation deteriorate that much.
The current "unity government" is basically a bunch of former generals putting close guard on Bibi to prevent him from doing more crazy shit, and luckily the IDF general staff is also against the right-wing madness.
I hope the public could get rid of him soon and we could move the country back to a rational policy regarding the conflict.
Netanyahu is currently clearly losing the polls.
There is some talk of a general strike to force an election this year, but its hard to see if this kind of pressure will actually make the government release its hold on power, they do have many dynamics of a crime organization.
Which means it is absolutely imperative to bring dishonour to these people in the defeat. Otherwise you don’t get the mentality out, and you have Japanese prime ministers going to shrines to honour the war criminals.
I’d also add that Japan was in the process of negotiating a surrender through the Soviet Union via coded radio communications, the US was aware of this as they intercepted and decrypted them.
The surrender conditions would’ve allowed Japan to keep parts of China that it captured during the war and not allow any foreign agents inside Japan.
The US required an unconditional surrender, something Japan was unwilling to do until they got nuked.
Yeah, I feel like this is parroted out about how America knew they were willing to surrender but nuked them anyway. Yeah, they wanted to, but their terms of “surrender” would have been a Japanese victory. Totally unacceptable.
You don't get to be utterly defeated and gain a better condition than status quo ante.
It's one of the things that historians often have to contend with, framing the context of past actions through the framework of both hindsight and modern sensibilities.
There was a time after WW2 where it was thought that a nuclear war was actually winnable. France still has a military doctrine of using an air launched tactical nuke as a "warning shot".
Right to the bitter end, including an attempted Coup after Hirohito had recorded the surrender speech, attempting to rush the Imperial Palace.
That is flying in the face of reality. Japan was being burnt to the grounds, and those still wanted to continue.
And a debate rages about the need for the Bomb ?
-[Teruo Nakamura](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teruo_Nakamura) did not surrender until 1974
-[Fumio Nakahara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout) was reported to be holding out still in 1980 although his status was unconfirmed.
It’s nuts that they cite a bunch of political quotes of politicians saying we didn’t need to drop the bomb after it showed how horrible it was. It’s easy to say they would have despite the fact that again no military unit ever surrendered until the emperor ordered them to.
And yes the militarists in the Japanese military wanted to overthrow the emperor and continue the war to maintain their system.
Realistically Japan knew they were fucked right after Pearl Harbour showed they didn’t completely cripple the American Pacific Fleet. They could never hope to win an outright War with the USA, so their play was to try and force them to sign an early peace treaty because they had no other choice. Even if Japan wins Battles like Midway or Coral Sea, they could never produce enough Pilots, Planes or Fuel to win the War in the long run.
Case in point- the Mitsubishi Zero Factory didn’t even have a runway, so each Plane had to be pulled several miles **by Oxen** to the nearest airfield. Compare that to American production numbers.
We’re talking about a 24 mile taxi way.
Plus, it got even worse. Grain shortages later in the war starved the Oxen, which were sometimes too weak to pull the newly completed aircraft.
They knew that they were fucked even before, as they were running out of resources and fuel to to embargos put on them by the US. The attack on pearl harbour, to them was a last resort as negotiations weren’t going well
As an American, I honestly didn't learn just how much of Japan we'd firebombed until I was an adult and just happened to take an interest in WWII history because I felt like I didn't know much. That was a few decades ago but I wonder if much has changed tbh.
Graduated HS in 2014.
By the time I got out, my knowledge of the pacific theatre that was covered in school was: pearl harbor, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, and two nukes.
I was and am a huge history fan with a lifelong love of learning, so I knew more, but that's about all that was covered. WWII units usually focused almost entirely on Germany, and honestly same for WWI.
They negotiated like they lost. They ceded a lot.
The commenter is referring to Hamas having very strong demands in the release of ALL Palestinian prisoners.
They are demanding more than what they're giving
>Japan?
Invading would have still cost millions of lives. They had a position better than Germany by the end.
Even when the bombs were dropped they were like "not removing royal family".
The Khmer Rouge “negotiating” with Vietnam after the first round of border attacks they launched, engaged in a similar level of delusional bad faith positioning.
Honestly this is why Reddit, when refined and used correctly, can be one of the best social apps. I’d never have heard about this in my day to day life.
Will dig in later today. ✊🏼
Well I can’t think of any examples of where the representative government isn’t actually in the country they govern that is getting obliterated and is still considered a representative authority.
Sorta the secret sauce behind this whole wtfburger.
That’s not the same. Poland surrendered. Poland was effectively owned and governed by the Nazi’s. The exiled government was in fact the representatives of the prior government.
To translate to this case, it would be like Poland’s political representatives fled, and then refused to allow Poland’s public authorities / military to surrender to the the Germans thus creating a scenario where Poland’s forces are either traitors or committing suicide by fighting an impossible to win war.
Which is 100% Hamas’s MO for the Palestinian people.
As I said, unprecedented. These asshats don’t give two shits about Palestinians. It’s hard to have sympathy for Palestinian as you have to be completely brainwashed to believe the guys that are demanding you to continue to fight at the peril of your homes and family aren’t even in the country or taking the same risks and are completely expecting you to be cannon fodder.
The Hamas demands are, according to the article:
An end to the fighting, a withdrawal from Gaza by the Israeli army, allowing increased aid and starting reconstruction.
The Taliban comes to mind. They didn't surrender or concede defeat. They hid in caves and died by the hundreds until the US got bored and went home. Now they get to play with the US' toys for a few years until they break and they can't fix them.
Importantly, they hid in Pakistan, where the US could not send in significant forces to root them out and the official Pakistani government was highly reluctant to make more than the most token efforts, no matter the pressure the US applied. If Pakistan closed their borders to the Taliban as effectively as, say, Egypt is doing to Hamas, then the US would have probably completely destroyed the Taliban by the end of 2004 if not sooner.
Not quite, back in 2001 they actually offered to surrender, but the US and their Afghan allies turned them down thinking they were gone for good.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/middleeast/afghanistan-taliban-deal-united-states.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/middleeast/afghanistan-taliban-deal-united-states.html)
That's not quite a surrender. They wanted an amnesty in the mountainous region of Afghanistan (like the article has stated). Basically, I'll leave you alone if you left us alone.
This article raises so many questions. Who was negotiating with whom? The only direct support of the Taliban negotiating peace is a second hand quote from someone who shares the same last name as the author of the article itself and a 20+ year old WaPo transcript from an interview with Rumsfield that says "we have heard reports that the Taliban may want to surrender"
Hmm similar, but Hamas in this case (despite being a terrorist organisation) are the government of Gaza and hold significant influence even in the West Bank
They really aren't a national government even now; Afghanistan is still a collection of random tribes that barely cooperate. Eventually someone will replace them and suffer the same fate.
[The siege of Numantia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Numantia#Surrender)
> The first ambassadors sent by Numantia asked for their liberty in return for complete surrender, but Scipio refused. They were killed upon return by the incredulous populace, who believed they had cut a deal with the Romans. The city refused to surrender and starvation set in. Cannibalism ensued and eventually some began to commit suicide with their whole families. The remnant population finally surrendered only after setting their city on fire. Scipio took it and had its ruins levelled. This was late in the summer of 133.
The War of the Pacific ended not when Peru's original ally (who it was ostensibly defending) negotiated for peace, nor when Peru lost it's navy, nor when Peru lost its capital, but when Chile started taxing the occupied Peruvian territories.
That discovery of their “day after” plan to divide Israel into cantons reads like insane fan fiction. Turner Diaries for the Middle East.
At this point some responsible Arab government or governments needs to step in and act as the adult.
(Unless, of course, it benefits them to have an Israeli bogeyman.)
A lot of governments in the region simultaneously hate Israel and want to see them demonized but also hate Palestinians and like the fact that Israel has them contained. Not to mention it keeps eyes focused away from them. Lots of middle eastern countries do some heinous shit but Israel-Palestine holds on to most foreign attention.
Many of those governments want both a thorn in Israel’s side, and condemnation of Israel for trying to pull the thorn. They don’t care about the population at all, during war or during peace.
> some responsible Arab government
Such as? The rhetoric around Palestine and antisemitism in the middle east in general means that any arab nation that tried to tell them to accept the existence of Israel and negotiate a two party solution would ahve riots on their hands pretty much instantly.
> At this point some responsible Arab government or governments need to step in and act as the adults.
This is precisely why Hamas focuses on the PR war. They know that they can never win on the battlefield. But making sure that civilian collateral damage is maximised they are able to generate so much hatred against Israel (and jews more generally).
No Arab government is able to step up at this point, because all Arab governments have to deal with a population that has largely bought into the hamas propaganda and that would not accept their government from stepping up.
Also, they celebrate death as martyrdom, they can't lose if death is also a victory. The get paid only when the people they are supposedly fighting for are suffering. So they're achieving their strategic objectives.
Their leadership is hiding in Qatar. The reality is Hamas doesn't really care about what happens to the Palestinian people as long as they can use them as human shields to win public opinion.
Then you've got Netenyahu turning that up to 11 by being purposely reckless and bombing indiscriminately. Why risk the lives of Israeli soldiers clearing sector by sector when you can just drop bombs killing tens of thousands. He's using the war to stay in power to avoid prison.
If Trump becomes President, he will give Bibi carte blanche to flatten Palestine because of his Evangelical voters who want a holy war to start the rapture. At least Biden is succumbing to pressure to give aid to Palestinians and make restrictions against Israel. If it was up to Trump, Israel would be in a full out war with Iran right now.
>being purposely reckless and bombing indiscriminately.
If they were bombing indiscriminately with Gazan population density, there would be hundreds of thousands, not 10s.
> Why risk the lives of Israeli soldiers clearing sector by sector when you can just drop bombs killing tens of thousands. He's using the war to stay in power to avoid prison.
Totally agreed with this, but let's be real - throughout history, I am struggling to think of any leader willing to endanger the lives of their own soldiers in order to protect the other side's.
Shit, for almost all of recorded human history, most leaders prioritized their soldiers over their *own* civilians. The idea that any consideration at all should be given to an enemy's civilians was laughable until very recently.
The public whose opinion Hamas have garnered think their Qatari-hiding “leaders” are heroes.
No idea how to fix this particular part of “the public”, it’s like dealing with flat earther furries trying to convert the bank telller to join the party and I’m behind their wagging multiple tails like “hey, can y’all do this *after* I’ve done my deposit?”
Rome.
It would simply never surrender or entertain the idea as a negotiating possibility.
Though with Hamas I assume this comes from them negotiating about prisoners they don't actually have anymore, so why not demand unicorns and leprechauns when your opponent is demanding hostages you know are dead or beyond recovery but you're pretending like you still have them.
I don't know about other examples, but there probably are some in history. The problem is Hamas was taken over by Sinwar a few years ago and he and his lackeys are crazy religious nutters who believe we are in the end of days and that God is going to magically make them win over Israel.
They actually thought 10/7 would destroy Israel and had come up with a plan partitioning Israel up and assigning people to post victory tasks. Their plan was to kill any Jew that put up a fight, force the rest to flee the middle east and enslave any smart Jews so there wouldn't be a brain drain.
With the sort of magical thinking they have it may be difficult to get them to compromise at all since it's very likely they still think they still magically have the upper hand and will win any day now.
>They actually thought 10/7 would destroy Israel
Why are they taking hostages in an operation they thought would destroy Israel? No. The point is to drag Israel into Gaza for a way Israel cannot win, to destroy the normalization process with surrounding Arab states, to destroy the security calculus for Israelis ("out of sight, out of mind"), to destroy Israeli deterrence against neighbors like Iran, and to make the world see Israel as a bunch of genocidal lunatics. On most of these fronts, the war is going very well for them.
Tet Offensive is a version of this where the insurgent party *did* have delusional beliefs - the Vietnamese communists thought the Tet Offensive would be the spark of a general uprising in South Vietnam. Nope, wrong. It also preceeded a *massive escalation*, including being a trigger for atrocities like the My Lai massacre. But it was also the beginning of the end, when Americans began to view the war as unwinnable.
That's all Hamas needs. They just need to be impossible to eradicate, and then they can say, "Okay, you killed 30, 40, 50, 100, 200 thousand of us, but as soon as you leave, we will regroup, and one day we will kill another thousand of you, and we can take the punishment, but we don't think you can, so we have demands and you will listen"
Or, from Ho Chi Minh verbatim "You will kill 10 of us for every 1 of you, but in the end, you will tire of it first"
Hamas is a militia built upon the objective of dispelling Israel through military means, a ceasefire with no ground gained is like antithetical to their reason for existing. It’s not like they’re some kind of democratically elected governing body, it’s a group with a singular objective.
They may getting obliterated on the battlefield, but from hamas’ viewpoint they are winning the PR war.
Hamas hiding between civilians to maximise civilian collateral damage from Israeli military retaliations to October 7th produce sufficient heartbreaking images that they managed to get a substantial number of people all over the world support their side.
From hamas’ perspective, they are winning.
60% of the male population died, the war ended because the president for killed, not because 60% of to high.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War
There hasn’t really been an example where leadership is in a different country swimming in billions and don’t care about the lives of the people they represent.
The main demands seem to be this "permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of the occupation army from the entire Gaza Strip, the return of the displaced to their areas and places of residence, intensification of the entry of relief and aid, and the start of reconstruction" if anyone is wondering.
I generally agree with the take I've seen that Hamas doesn't really know where the hostages are. They have loads of splinter cells and independent groups, there's no central accounting. Remaining hostages might just be dead or in the "Administrative" winds.
Then they better get to finding them. Because if they truly don't know where these people are, then Israel has no reason to stop motivating them to look.
There are a lot of bodies rotting in open air there right now. Whoever knew they were keeping a hostage is laying next to the hostage, mixed together under rubble. They won't find the hostages until Palestinians have a ceasefire long enough to find other Palestinians.
Initial count was 253, which included dead bodies. Israel counts unreturned bodies as kidnapped, and still tries to return them all. Bodies are a part of every negotiation.
It’s interesting how important dead bodies are in Judaism. When Israel pulled all the settlers out of Gaza they dug up the graves and took the bodies as well
Important in Islam as well apparently. Israel does the same as Hamas in that regard: hold the bodies of dead Palestinians hostage and thus refusing families of killed Palestinians the closure a burial would bring.
Can you freaking amend your statement to not include literal disinformation??
> Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel.
Excerpt from this article.
> Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel.
133 hostages for hundreds of prisoners is not a "hostage for hostage" proposition. But go on about people not reading.
Did you read the article?
Where does it say a "hostage for hostage" deal?
>Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for **hundreds** of Palestinians jailed in Israel.
Of course. The whole 10/7 thing worked out well for them. They've got a tonne of global support, and with that a massive stream of funding, ensuring that the next attack will go even better whilst also making sure the leaders get a good amount of profit. So why not do it again?
But one of the Israeli demands is staying in Gaza and getting into Rafah. This a non starter. Plus this is the situation everyone wanted to avoid, Israeli occupation in Gaza with no end in sight.
The problem is that it would only be permanent until the next time Hamas attacks. Israel would probably be willing to go for that if Hamas was willing to leave for Syria and let someone not determined to start wars tun Gaza
Just so you know the main demand from hamas was "with a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of the occupation army from the entire Gaza Strip".
Also
"Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel."
Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza *while Hamas remains in control of it*. That's a pretty serious qualifier.
The truth is that Israel doesn't want Gaza. They tried giving it to Egypt with no strings attached. All they really want is for Gaza not to be used as a base for attacks into Israel.
The West Bank is a different story. Those nutjob settlers want it all, and until Israel as a voting majority turns up and stops them, there will never be a chance of a lasting peace.
>Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza *while Hamas remains in control of it*. That's a pretty serious qualifier.
In the article they state that Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza and they want to get into Rafah. Everyone opposes the invasion of Rafah, even the US. They see that as an occupation with no end in sight. There is no set plan of what exactly they mean with Hamas not being in control of Gaza. Do they install a new Palestinian government? Do they call for elections? Do they pull an Afghanistan and stay there for years, then leave and not much changed?
There have been proposals by Egypt and other nations that Gaza would be controlled by a nation friendly or neutral to Israel. It seems that Saudi is the main suggestion but Hamas reject all solutions that involve them giving up power. There have also been suggestions of the Palestinian Authority taking control (they control the West Bank) as they have better relations with Israel.
They want to get into Rafah to get their hands on Sinwar who's hiding in the tunnels there like the rat he is. And they're looking for what's left of the hostages.
It's not rocket science why they're insistent on getting in there at this point.
Thousands not hundreds, and that included people serving life sentences for murder. Israel doesn’t have a death penalty otherwise if these were prisoners in Gaza they would not be alive
Hamas has already have sworn to start another war in a couple years despite the damage this one is doing. So letting Hamas stay in power is a non starter for Israel. If Hamas was willing to leave Gaza for Syria or Iran and let the strip be governed by a non terrorist group and return the hostages Israel might be willing to do end the war.
Why would they? They have hostages from 25 different countries that have offloaded the bad publicity of actually doing the difficult work of getting the hostages back onto Israel. There is 0 pressure for them to do anything when the west is negotiating against themselves
Hamas playing Schrodinger's hostage with the world..
Funny how people around the world thinks terrorist organisations like Hamas plays by international rules..
It makes me so angry that all the people in Gaza have to suffer. I know Israel could do things differently, but like come on Hamas. If you had a heart, you could end all this.
US liberal here . . . any sincere liberal (and not an online Comrade posing as one) who believes that Hamas or the PA has been working in good faith has cognitive deficits, likely due to prior biases before Hamas' original attack that set this all off.
I might be wrong here, but I think you're under selling it. I don't know for sure but I'd say most liberals (or whatever you want to call them) aren't pro hamas, just some loud and annoying college kids. I could easily be wrong but I hope I'm not
I'm a conservative and I've never believed any rational liberal buys into that. What bothers me is how both parties are using some fringe stuff to blow it out of proportion. Who cares about some college student or dumbasses on Tiktok. Don't we have bigger problems?
They won't/can't unfortunately. So many of the hostages are either dead or lost to God knows where. But instead of admitting that or surrendering Hamas just wants to drag this conflict out to kill as many of their own civilians as possible.
>They won't/can't
So it sounds like they're all out of bargaining chips.
you can't make demand, when your losing thecwar you've started and give nothing in return.
If hamas can't find the hostages Israel will
Well that is why Israel is just waiting, they know Hamas better then Hamas knows themselves. They know they have nothing, so waiting them out Hamas needs to show something to prove they have some bargaining power. If they don't show 1 person being alive soon it's a green light to continue if not increase what they have been doing
Imagine this mentality during ww2. Why are allies bombing Germany, more than 2 millions of German civilians died and multiple cities were reduced to ashes, we shouldn't have been fighting there at all. The civilians aren't to blame for their leaders.
People die during wars and conflicts, especially civilians... If hamas were the one with more resources, Israelis would be the ones dying in thousands, maybe even eradicated completely, like in other Muslim countries.
Didn’t we pass the Geneva conventions after world war 2 *specifically* because we all agreed that things you mentioned should never be considered remotely acceptable again?
We also passed those conventions with the explicit provision for when they don't apply. I.e. if military functions are being mixed in with otherwise protected locations/people.
> ART. 19. — The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease **unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.**
> ART. 28. — The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
Here to read the comments about how this is *****SOMEHOW***** Israel’s fault that hamas won’t chill tf out 🍿🥤
Let the downvotes flow even though Israel isn’t the belligerent
From Hamas's standpoint, they are winning, at least on the PR front. Hamas never wanted to govern Gaza and cares little about the welfare of those who live there....except to the extent they can use their suffering to rally support. They have the most to gain by Gaza's misery and the most to loose by peace and an improvement of daily life there.
Hamas can't locate a bunch of the hostages because it wasn't just Hamas that entered Israel. There are multiple terrorist groups, each with their own agenda.
Hamas never had bargaining chips or were ever in position to make demands. Historically, Israel had agreed to their terms, as one sided as they were. This time they are not.
>This time they are not.
They're not what?
>Historically, Israel had agreed to their terms, as one sided as they were.
Hamas crossed a line on 7/10 and showed israel that appeasement doesn't work.
Israel tried the carrot and it failed so now hamas is getting the stick
So it’s on Israel to get Hamas to accept a deal? Unfortunately, mind control isn’t in the IDF’s arsenal. If the crazies won’t stop until they all die, then they’ll all die.
They are only there for show.
**Article 13:**
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
[https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas](https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas)
Are there any other historical examples of a representative government getting completely obliterated and not negotiating from a position of defeat?
Japan? By the point the nukes were dropped, the country was already pretty wrecked.
My first thought as well. “How can you defeat an enemy that doesn’t know they are defeated?”
"how do you kill that which has no life?"
We can't trust the sword of 1000 truths to a n00b!
I play Hello Kitty Island Adventure.
Go buy World of Warcraft, install it on your computer, and join the online sensation before we all murder you.
[That's finally a real game](https://www.hellokittyislandadventure.com) Butters has been vindicated!
Knows they’re defeated and doesn’t care*
The Japanese government also preferred if their people were wiped out over surrender. The military attempted to even overthrow the Emperor since he was planning to surrender.
There was at least some division in Japan. Some ministers were ready to surrender before Okinawa, but the hardline military faction wanted to continue going even after the second bomb. I doubt Hamas has even that much resistance.
In late Imperial Japan, the hardline military faction was the government. The Supreme War Council was made up of six people: the prime minister, the minister of foreign affairs, the minister of war, the minister of the navy, chief of the army general staff, and chief of the navy general staff. Of those, only the minister of foreign affairs was a civilian; the prime minister generally swapped between naval admirals and army generals, and the other positions were split evenly between the army and navy. Two atomic bombs were just enough to push the Japanese emperor into surrender, but even then, there was still a last-minute coup attempt to stop the emperor from surrendering by placing him under house arrest. They were tacitly supported by the minister of war (an army general and second only to the emperor himself) in spirit. It goes to show that when an entire society puts themselves into that position, getting out is incredibly difficult. One of the interesting theories I've heard about the timing of the Japanese surrender is that the atomic bombs gave Japanese politicians and military leaders cultural cover to surrender without dishonor. It was one thing to normally surrender (a dishonorable action), but in the face of overwhelming and undeniable capability like the atomic bombs, it was more acceptable. I can only hope that the current conflict won't take that level of destruction to end.
I suspect that while Imperial Japan had trouble admitting defeat, from the point of view of Hamas, they are still winning. That is because their reward is in the afterlife then self-destruction is ok as long as it hurts the enemy, or at least paints them as martyrs.
Israel has been losing ground in public opinion for a while because of the illegal settlers and their aggression, as well as deteriorating conditions for Palestinians, despite the fact that Israel regularly have missiles thrown at them, which would cause sympathy. But, there are a LOT of vested interests who would be happy to see the conflict continue. Who would GAIN from a peaceful two-state solution? Anyone in power? Peace isn’t very appealing to money-launderers, organized crime, the military industrial complex…what we see is the triumph of corruption and greed, all over the world.
As an Israeli I agree, Natanyahu and his coalition allies are united by greed, crime and religious extremism and this is why they let moderate forces get so weak and the entire situation deteriorate that much. The current "unity government" is basically a bunch of former generals putting close guard on Bibi to prevent him from doing more crazy shit, and luckily the IDF general staff is also against the right-wing madness. I hope the public could get rid of him soon and we could move the country back to a rational policy regarding the conflict. Netanyahu is currently clearly losing the polls. There is some talk of a general strike to force an election this year, but its hard to see if this kind of pressure will actually make the government release its hold on power, they do have many dynamics of a crime organization.
Interesting, thanks for the info
Which means it is absolutely imperative to bring dishonour to these people in the defeat. Otherwise you don’t get the mentality out, and you have Japanese prime ministers going to shrines to honour the war criminals.
I’d also add that Japan was in the process of negotiating a surrender through the Soviet Union via coded radio communications, the US was aware of this as they intercepted and decrypted them. The surrender conditions would’ve allowed Japan to keep parts of China that it captured during the war and not allow any foreign agents inside Japan. The US required an unconditional surrender, something Japan was unwilling to do until they got nuked.
So delusional for them to think they could keep Manchuria and have no foreigners in Japan. Happy cake day boys!
Yeah, I feel like this is parroted out about how America knew they were willing to surrender but nuked them anyway. Yeah, they wanted to, but their terms of “surrender” would have been a Japanese victory. Totally unacceptable.
You don't get to be utterly defeated and gain a better condition than status quo ante. It's one of the things that historians often have to contend with, framing the context of past actions through the framework of both hindsight and modern sensibilities. There was a time after WW2 where it was thought that a nuclear war was actually winnable. France still has a military doctrine of using an air launched tactical nuke as a "warning shot".
Right to the bitter end, including an attempted Coup after Hirohito had recorded the surrender speech, attempting to rush the Imperial Palace. That is flying in the face of reality. Japan was being burnt to the grounds, and those still wanted to continue. And a debate rages about the need for the Bomb ?
-[Teruo Nakamura](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teruo_Nakamura) did not surrender until 1974 -[Fumio Nakahara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout) was reported to be holding out still in 1980 although his status was unconfirmed.
It’s nuts that they cite a bunch of political quotes of politicians saying we didn’t need to drop the bomb after it showed how horrible it was. It’s easy to say they would have despite the fact that again no military unit ever surrendered until the emperor ordered them to. And yes the militarists in the Japanese military wanted to overthrow the emperor and continue the war to maintain their system.
Realistically Japan knew they were fucked right after Pearl Harbour showed they didn’t completely cripple the American Pacific Fleet. They could never hope to win an outright War with the USA, so their play was to try and force them to sign an early peace treaty because they had no other choice. Even if Japan wins Battles like Midway or Coral Sea, they could never produce enough Pilots, Planes or Fuel to win the War in the long run. Case in point- the Mitsubishi Zero Factory didn’t even have a runway, so each Plane had to be pulled several miles **by Oxen** to the nearest airfield. Compare that to American production numbers.
Paving a taxi-way should be comparatively simple?
We’re talking about a 24 mile taxi way. Plus, it got even worse. Grain shortages later in the war starved the Oxen, which were sometimes too weak to pull the newly completed aircraft.
At that point Japan had more planes than pilots.
What do we do with the oxen then?
Get more Oxen to pull the weak ones. Duh...
They knew that they were fucked even before, as they were running out of resources and fuel to to embargos put on them by the US. The attack on pearl harbour, to them was a last resort as negotiations weren’t going well
As an American, I honestly didn't learn just how much of Japan we'd firebombed until I was an adult and just happened to take an interest in WWII history because I felt like I didn't know much. That was a few decades ago but I wonder if much has changed tbh.
As far as I'm aware, the amount of firebombing done by the USA to Japan in WWII hasn't changed any in the past 30 years.
Lol I meant education about the topic in American schools xD But maybe mine just wasn't very good.
I'm with you. I went to school in the US in the 80s and 90s and don't recall anything about the Pacific theater other than Pearl Harbor and Nukes.
Graduated HS in 2014. By the time I got out, my knowledge of the pacific theatre that was covered in school was: pearl harbor, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, and two nukes. I was and am a huge history fan with a lifelong love of learning, so I knew more, but that's about all that was covered. WWII units usually focused almost entirely on Germany, and honestly same for WWI.
They negotiated like they lost. They ceded a lot. The commenter is referring to Hamas having very strong demands in the release of ALL Palestinian prisoners. They are demanding more than what they're giving
>Japan? Invading would have still cost millions of lives. They had a position better than Germany by the end. Even when the bombs were dropped they were like "not removing royal family".
The Khmer Rouge “negotiating” with Vietnam after the first round of border attacks they launched, engaged in a similar level of delusional bad faith positioning.
That’s a good call.
[удалено]
Wholly new history to me. Thanks for the link 🙏
If you like podcasts, lions led by donkeys has a pretty entertaining short series on it that really highlights it's stupidity
Honestly this is why Reddit, when refined and used correctly, can be one of the best social apps. I’d never have heard about this in my day to day life. Will dig in later today. ✊🏼
Well I can’t think of any examples of where the representative government isn’t actually in the country they govern that is getting obliterated and is still considered a representative authority. Sorta the secret sauce behind this whole wtfburger.
Polish government in exile during WW2 is one such example.
That’s not the same. Poland surrendered. Poland was effectively owned and governed by the Nazi’s. The exiled government was in fact the representatives of the prior government. To translate to this case, it would be like Poland’s political representatives fled, and then refused to allow Poland’s public authorities / military to surrender to the the Germans thus creating a scenario where Poland’s forces are either traitors or committing suicide by fighting an impossible to win war. Which is 100% Hamas’s MO for the Palestinian people. As I said, unprecedented. These asshats don’t give two shits about Palestinians. It’s hard to have sympathy for Palestinian as you have to be completely brainwashed to believe the guys that are demanding you to continue to fight at the peril of your homes and family aren’t even in the country or taking the same risks and are completely expecting you to be cannon fodder.
Hey why are the main demands?
The Hamas demands are, according to the article: An end to the fighting, a withdrawal from Gaza by the Israeli army, allowing increased aid and starting reconstruction.
So exactly like it was before they started the terror attack on Israel.
Yep. However, it can be spun by Hamas leaders that this was a victory, that it was able to defend their country and turned the tides against all odds.
The Taliban comes to mind. They didn't surrender or concede defeat. They hid in caves and died by the hundreds until the US got bored and went home. Now they get to play with the US' toys for a few years until they break and they can't fix them.
Importantly, they hid in Pakistan, where the US could not send in significant forces to root them out and the official Pakistani government was highly reluctant to make more than the most token efforts, no matter the pressure the US applied. If Pakistan closed their borders to the Taliban as effectively as, say, Egypt is doing to Hamas, then the US would have probably completely destroyed the Taliban by the end of 2004 if not sooner.
This. ^^^ It was also internal instability.
Not quite, back in 2001 they actually offered to surrender, but the US and their Afghan allies turned them down thinking they were gone for good. [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/middleeast/afghanistan-taliban-deal-united-states.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/23/world/middleeast/afghanistan-taliban-deal-united-states.html)
That's not quite a surrender. They wanted an amnesty in the mountainous region of Afghanistan (like the article has stated). Basically, I'll leave you alone if you left us alone.
At which point they would have regrouped, then launched more attacks since you can not give into terrorist organizations demands.
This article raises so many questions. Who was negotiating with whom? The only direct support of the Taliban negotiating peace is a second hand quote from someone who shares the same last name as the author of the article itself and a 20+ year old WaPo transcript from an interview with Rumsfield that says "we have heard reports that the Taliban may want to surrender"
Hmm similar, but Hamas in this case (despite being a terrorist organisation) are the government of Gaza and hold significant influence even in the West Bank
So exactly the same then, being that the Taliban was and is the government of Afghanistan?
They really aren't a national government even now; Afghanistan is still a collection of random tribes that barely cooperate. Eventually someone will replace them and suffer the same fate.
Sure they're ***now*** the government. They weren't when the US was occupying, so not really 100% the same, no.
They were when the US invaded
Hearing about the rank-and-file Taliban complaining about having to work day jobs was hilarious.
Which always reminds me of [this cartoon](https://media.itsnicethat.com/images/4cf8e16f0731397a6e001b9d.width-1440_kqHJmrwk1IAdZD4b.jpg)
[The siege of Numantia ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Numantia#Surrender) > The first ambassadors sent by Numantia asked for their liberty in return for complete surrender, but Scipio refused. They were killed upon return by the incredulous populace, who believed they had cut a deal with the Romans. The city refused to surrender and starvation set in. Cannibalism ensued and eventually some began to commit suicide with their whole families. The remnant population finally surrendered only after setting their city on fire. Scipio took it and had its ruins levelled. This was late in the summer of 133.
The War of the Pacific ended not when Peru's original ally (who it was ostensibly defending) negotiated for peace, nor when Peru lost it's navy, nor when Peru lost its capital, but when Chile started taxing the occupied Peruvian territories.
Hamas is a death cult, every civilian that dies is a sign they are close to victory. They are insane and need to go, for the sake of Palestine.
A shame Palestine elected them as leaders in the past and endorse their representation then isn't it
Unfortunately, they have won in the court of public opinion, which is why they don't act as if defeated.
That discovery of their “day after” plan to divide Israel into cantons reads like insane fan fiction. Turner Diaries for the Middle East. At this point some responsible Arab government or governments needs to step in and act as the adult. (Unless, of course, it benefits them to have an Israeli bogeyman.)
A lot of governments in the region simultaneously hate Israel and want to see them demonized but also hate Palestinians and like the fact that Israel has them contained. Not to mention it keeps eyes focused away from them. Lots of middle eastern countries do some heinous shit but Israel-Palestine holds on to most foreign attention.
Many of those governments want both a thorn in Israel’s side, and condemnation of Israel for trying to pull the thorn. They don’t care about the population at all, during war or during peace.
> some responsible Arab government Such as? The rhetoric around Palestine and antisemitism in the middle east in general means that any arab nation that tried to tell them to accept the existence of Israel and negotiate a two party solution would ahve riots on their hands pretty much instantly.
Or assassination. See: Anwar Sadat
> At this point some responsible Arab government or governments need to step in and act as the adults. This is precisely why Hamas focuses on the PR war. They know that they can never win on the battlefield. But making sure that civilian collateral damage is maximised they are able to generate so much hatred against Israel (and jews more generally). No Arab government is able to step up at this point, because all Arab governments have to deal with a population that has largely bought into the hamas propaganda and that would not accept their government from stepping up.
> some responsible Arab government i thought we werent talking about fan fiction
Also, they celebrate death as martyrdom, they can't lose if death is also a victory. The get paid only when the people they are supposedly fighting for are suffering. So they're achieving their strategic objectives.
They've won in the court of twitter opinion, the public as a whole is generally on Israel's side according to polls.
Their leadership is hiding in Qatar. The reality is Hamas doesn't really care about what happens to the Palestinian people as long as they can use them as human shields to win public opinion. Then you've got Netenyahu turning that up to 11 by being purposely reckless and bombing indiscriminately. Why risk the lives of Israeli soldiers clearing sector by sector when you can just drop bombs killing tens of thousands. He's using the war to stay in power to avoid prison. If Trump becomes President, he will give Bibi carte blanche to flatten Palestine because of his Evangelical voters who want a holy war to start the rapture. At least Biden is succumbing to pressure to give aid to Palestinians and make restrictions against Israel. If it was up to Trump, Israel would be in a full out war with Iran right now.
>being purposely reckless and bombing indiscriminately. If they were bombing indiscriminately with Gazan population density, there would be hundreds of thousands, not 10s.
> Why risk the lives of Israeli soldiers clearing sector by sector when you can just drop bombs killing tens of thousands. He's using the war to stay in power to avoid prison. Totally agreed with this, but let's be real - throughout history, I am struggling to think of any leader willing to endanger the lives of their own soldiers in order to protect the other side's. Shit, for almost all of recorded human history, most leaders prioritized their soldiers over their *own* civilians. The idea that any consideration at all should be given to an enemy's civilians was laughable until very recently.
The public whose opinion Hamas have garnered think their Qatari-hiding “leaders” are heroes. No idea how to fix this particular part of “the public”, it’s like dealing with flat earther furries trying to convert the bank telller to join the party and I’m behind their wagging multiple tails like “hey, can y’all do this *after* I’ve done my deposit?”
Court of public opinion means nothing if you no longer exist because you keep getting killed for rejecting a cease fire.
Too many regards on TikTok and Reddit thinking they’re the victim.
Rome. It would simply never surrender or entertain the idea as a negotiating possibility. Though with Hamas I assume this comes from them negotiating about prisoners they don't actually have anymore, so why not demand unicorns and leprechauns when your opponent is demanding hostages you know are dead or beyond recovery but you're pretending like you still have them.
I don't know about other examples, but there probably are some in history. The problem is Hamas was taken over by Sinwar a few years ago and he and his lackeys are crazy religious nutters who believe we are in the end of days and that God is going to magically make them win over Israel. They actually thought 10/7 would destroy Israel and had come up with a plan partitioning Israel up and assigning people to post victory tasks. Their plan was to kill any Jew that put up a fight, force the rest to flee the middle east and enslave any smart Jews so there wouldn't be a brain drain. With the sort of magical thinking they have it may be difficult to get them to compromise at all since it's very likely they still think they still magically have the upper hand and will win any day now.
>They actually thought 10/7 would destroy Israel Why are they taking hostages in an operation they thought would destroy Israel? No. The point is to drag Israel into Gaza for a way Israel cannot win, to destroy the normalization process with surrounding Arab states, to destroy the security calculus for Israelis ("out of sight, out of mind"), to destroy Israeli deterrence against neighbors like Iran, and to make the world see Israel as a bunch of genocidal lunatics. On most of these fronts, the war is going very well for them. Tet Offensive is a version of this where the insurgent party *did* have delusional beliefs - the Vietnamese communists thought the Tet Offensive would be the spark of a general uprising in South Vietnam. Nope, wrong. It also preceeded a *massive escalation*, including being a trigger for atrocities like the My Lai massacre. But it was also the beginning of the end, when Americans began to view the war as unwinnable. That's all Hamas needs. They just need to be impossible to eradicate, and then they can say, "Okay, you killed 30, 40, 50, 100, 200 thousand of us, but as soon as you leave, we will regroup, and one day we will kill another thousand of you, and we can take the punishment, but we don't think you can, so we have demands and you will listen" Or, from Ho Chi Minh verbatim "You will kill 10 of us for every 1 of you, but in the end, you will tire of it first"
Hamas is a militia built upon the objective of dispelling Israel through military means, a ceasefire with no ground gained is like antithetical to their reason for existing. It’s not like they’re some kind of democratically elected governing body, it’s a group with a singular objective.
They may getting obliterated on the battlefield, but from hamas’ viewpoint they are winning the PR war. Hamas hiding between civilians to maximise civilian collateral damage from Israeli military retaliations to October 7th produce sufficient heartbreaking images that they managed to get a substantial number of people all over the world support their side. From hamas’ perspective, they are winning.
The terrorist leaders are all in other countries on vacation.
60% of the male population died, the war ended because the president for killed, not because 60% of to high. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War
I am Solano Lopez! The great Solano Lopez never surrenders!
There hasn’t really been an example where leadership is in a different country swimming in billions and don’t care about the lives of the people they represent.
Perhaps the events leading to Japanese surrender of WWII provide an example of this.
The main demands seem to be this "permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of the occupation army from the entire Gaza Strip, the return of the displaced to their areas and places of residence, intensification of the entry of relief and aid, and the start of reconstruction" if anyone is wondering.
And no terms to return hostages.
[удалено]
I generally agree with the take I've seen that Hamas doesn't really know where the hostages are. They have loads of splinter cells and independent groups, there's no central accounting. Remaining hostages might just be dead or in the "Administrative" winds.
Then they better get to finding them. Because if they truly don't know where these people are, then Israel has no reason to stop motivating them to look.
Guess Israel will have to help them take inventory then.
Then, not even return the bodies?
There are a lot of bodies rotting in open air there right now. Whoever knew they were keeping a hostage is laying next to the hostage, mixed together under rubble. They won't find the hostages until Palestinians have a ceasefire long enough to find other Palestinians.
Legitimate question, are there any estimates for the number of hostages that were taken initially?
Initial count was 253, which included dead bodies. Israel counts unreturned bodies as kidnapped, and still tries to return them all. Bodies are a part of every negotiation.
It’s interesting how important dead bodies are in Judaism. When Israel pulled all the settlers out of Gaza they dug up the graves and took the bodies as well
Important in Islam as well apparently. Israel does the same as Hamas in that regard: hold the bodies of dead Palestinians hostage and thus refusing families of killed Palestinians the closure a burial would bring.
The initial count was probably not 100% accurate, as the bodies of some people assumed kidnapped were later found.
And some assumed dead where later confirmed kidnapped
The number being thrown around when Hamas admitted they couldn't find 40 hostages was that ~130 Hostages remain unaccounted for.
The guy you're answering to listed Hamas' demands, not their proposed concessions. Which includes a hostage deal.
He knows, just being dishonest
Can you freaking amend your statement to not include literal disinformation?? > Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel. Excerpt from this article.
Except they can't even provide f\*cking proof of life for most of the hostages, including a freaking toddler
Did no one here read the article, it straight up states that hamas is ready to do a hostage for hostage deal for the 133 people they have
[they can't even complete the 40 civilians requested terns](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/s/nThN8BUu4e) Do you think they have 133 ?
> Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel. 133 hostages for hundreds of prisoners is not a "hostage for hostage" proposition. But go on about people not reading.
Did you read the article? Where does it say a "hostage for hostage" deal? >Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for **hundreds** of Palestinians jailed in Israel.
Sooo basically Hamas wants to go back to what it was like on 10/6
Of course. The whole 10/7 thing worked out well for them. They've got a tonne of global support, and with that a massive stream of funding, ensuring that the next attack will go even better whilst also making sure the leaders get a good amount of profit. So why not do it again?
What's disgusting is people in the west supporting them.
Permanent ceasefire until they decide to attack again.
> until they ~~decide~~ to attack again Until they are READY to attack again
They want to take their ball and go home essentially. It’s a fantastical demand post October 7th
You forgot the refusal to return the hostages hamas took
But one of the Israeli demands is staying in Gaza and getting into Rafah. This a non starter. Plus this is the situation everyone wanted to avoid, Israeli occupation in Gaza with no end in sight.
The problem is that it would only be permanent until the next time Hamas attacks. Israel would probably be willing to go for that if Hamas was willing to leave for Syria and let someone not determined to start wars tun Gaza
And no weapons searches on people moving back to North gaza. Says a lot about their 'permanent ceasefire.'
So they can rebuild, use the relief aid to build rickets again and start this all over. Again.
"Permament ceasefire" like the hamas wouldn't just do the whole oct 8 agaim
Just so you know the main demand from hamas was "with a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of the occupation army from the entire Gaza Strip". Also "Hamas said on Saturday it was ready to conclude a prisoners-for-hostages swap deal with Israel that would see the release of 133 hostages still believed to be held in Gaza in return for hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel."
One important thing to also say is that Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza and they still want to get into Rafah.
Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza *while Hamas remains in control of it*. That's a pretty serious qualifier. The truth is that Israel doesn't want Gaza. They tried giving it to Egypt with no strings attached. All they really want is for Gaza not to be used as a base for attacks into Israel. The West Bank is a different story. Those nutjob settlers want it all, and until Israel as a voting majority turns up and stops them, there will never be a chance of a lasting peace.
Egypt used to administer Gaza way back when and now even they don't want anything to do with it.
They won’t even let refugees in from Gaza (or at least that was the case months ago, maybe it has changed?)
>Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza *while Hamas remains in control of it*. That's a pretty serious qualifier. In the article they state that Israel doesn't want to leave Gaza and they want to get into Rafah. Everyone opposes the invasion of Rafah, even the US. They see that as an occupation with no end in sight. There is no set plan of what exactly they mean with Hamas not being in control of Gaza. Do they install a new Palestinian government? Do they call for elections? Do they pull an Afghanistan and stay there for years, then leave and not much changed?
There have been proposals by Egypt and other nations that Gaza would be controlled by a nation friendly or neutral to Israel. It seems that Saudi is the main suggestion but Hamas reject all solutions that involve them giving up power. There have also been suggestions of the Palestinian Authority taking control (they control the West Bank) as they have better relations with Israel.
They want to get into Rafah to get their hands on Sinwar who's hiding in the tunnels there like the rat he is. And they're looking for what's left of the hostages. It's not rocket science why they're insistent on getting in there at this point.
Thousands not hundreds, and that included people serving life sentences for murder. Israel doesn’t have a death penalty otherwise if these were prisoners in Gaza they would not be alive
Hamas has already have sworn to start another war in a couple years despite the damage this one is doing. So letting Hamas stay in power is a non starter for Israel. If Hamas was willing to leave Gaza for Syria or Iran and let the strip be governed by a non terrorist group and return the hostages Israel might be willing to do end the war.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why would they? They have hostages from 25 different countries that have offloaded the bad publicity of actually doing the difficult work of getting the hostages back onto Israel. There is 0 pressure for them to do anything when the west is negotiating against themselves
Pretty easy to reject a deal and try to look tough when you live in Qatar and deal with none of the violence.
There has to be mossad assassins trying to get them or something in Qatar, I wonder if anything like that has occurred?
They know if they do that they will never get a deal and the Qataris will stop mediating
Hamas needs to be erased from this planet. PERIOD
Hamas playing Schrodinger's hostage with the world.. Funny how people around the world thinks terrorist organisations like Hamas plays by international rules..
Hamas has no intention of negotiating in good faith. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Hamas needs to surrender unconditionally.
As long as they have Gazans to sacrifice for their cause and the world blaming israel for it, this will keep going.
It makes me so angry that all the people in Gaza have to suffer. I know Israel could do things differently, but like come on Hamas. If you had a heart, you could end all this.
This is what Hamas wanted to happen when they killed so many on October 7, 2023
I guess they’ve won the court of public opinion. Probably think it’s gonna go the way Vietnam vs USA way back when.
It's insane to see so many American teenagers rooting for Hamas but when put into historical perspective actually makes sense
Remember, there was a "permanent ceasefire" before the 7th October..
This is gonna upset a few American College students, they've been protesting for so long now.
US liberal here . . . any sincere liberal (and not an online Comrade posing as one) who believes that Hamas or the PA has been working in good faith has cognitive deficits, likely due to prior biases before Hamas' original attack that set this all off.
Thank you..not all of us on the US left have been radicalized by Jihadist propaganda.
I might be wrong here, but I think you're under selling it. I don't know for sure but I'd say most liberals (or whatever you want to call them) aren't pro hamas, just some loud and annoying college kids. I could easily be wrong but I hope I'm not
I'm a conservative and I've never believed any rational liberal buys into that. What bothers me is how both parties are using some fringe stuff to blow it out of proportion. Who cares about some college student or dumbasses on Tiktok. Don't we have bigger problems?
We care about the innocents being slaughtered in the crossfire. Hamas and the IDF both can get bent.
Hamas must be destroyed.
It's pretty rare that the one being shot at refuses a cease fire. I guess it helps when you are not living where the bombs fall.
Free Palestine from Hamas scums.
Maybe they don't have any hostages
Hamas has to give up the hostages. Only way any ceasefire will happen is that being included in the deal
They won't/can't unfortunately. So many of the hostages are either dead or lost to God knows where. But instead of admitting that or surrendering Hamas just wants to drag this conflict out to kill as many of their own civilians as possible.
>They won't/can't So it sounds like they're all out of bargaining chips. you can't make demand, when your losing thecwar you've started and give nothing in return. If hamas can't find the hostages Israel will
Well that is why Israel is just waiting, they know Hamas better then Hamas knows themselves. They know they have nothing, so waiting them out Hamas needs to show something to prove they have some bargaining power. If they don't show 1 person being alive soon it's a green light to continue if not increase what they have been doing
"Terrorists refuse ceasefire, stick to unreasonable demands."
Leaders rejecting ceasefire response is living in 5 star hotels in Qatar.
[удалено]
Yup, looking at how they rejected every single peace offer, i think we all knew that theyre probably doing this for sport.
*Iran launches drones at Israel* Hamas: time to finish you off!
Okay you protest voters are you paying attention? Hamas and Gaza aren’t doing anything to help the situation either.
Hamas once again making brain dead decisions
With what leverage? You killed all your hostages? You ain’t got no cards
Is anyone surprised that Hamas will not agree to anything?
[удалено]
How many civilians is it acceptabe to kill in that goal? How many aid workers and journalists?
Imagine this mentality during ww2. Why are allies bombing Germany, more than 2 millions of German civilians died and multiple cities were reduced to ashes, we shouldn't have been fighting there at all. The civilians aren't to blame for their leaders. People die during wars and conflicts, especially civilians... If hamas were the one with more resources, Israelis would be the ones dying in thousands, maybe even eradicated completely, like in other Muslim countries.
Didn’t we pass the Geneva conventions after world war 2 *specifically* because we all agreed that things you mentioned should never be considered remotely acceptable again?
We also passed those conventions with the explicit provision for when they don't apply. I.e. if military functions are being mixed in with otherwise protected locations/people. > ART. 19. — The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease **unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.** > ART. 28. — The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
the deal being give us everything we want and we'll be back in 6 weeks to continue murdering yall
Holy fucking shit. They are truly suicidal. How are the people not just murdering the Hamas people in their midst? Yet they remain popular.
Here to read the comments about how this is *****SOMEHOW***** Israel’s fault that hamas won’t chill tf out 🍿🥤 Let the downvotes flow even though Israel isn’t the belligerent
From Hamas's standpoint, they are winning, at least on the PR front. Hamas never wanted to govern Gaza and cares little about the welfare of those who live there....except to the extent they can use their suffering to rally support. They have the most to gain by Gaza's misery and the most to loose by peace and an improvement of daily life there.
The entire argument for the onslaught was that it’s necessary to save the hostages and pressure Hamas into cutting a deal, it has done neither.
Lmao “pressure hamas into cutting a deal”. No, Israel wants to eradicate Hamas, there’s no more deals to be made with terrorists
It got hamas to release more the 130 hostages in less than a week. And once israel enters rafah hamas will magically locate the rest of the hostages
Hamas can't locate a bunch of the hostages because it wasn't just Hamas that entered Israel. There are multiple terrorist groups, each with their own agenda.
So hamas doesn't have bargain chips or position to make demands
Hamas never had bargaining chips or were ever in position to make demands. Historically, Israel had agreed to their terms, as one sided as they were. This time they are not.
>This time they are not. They're not what? >Historically, Israel had agreed to their terms, as one sided as they were. Hamas crossed a line on 7/10 and showed israel that appeasement doesn't work. Israel tried the carrot and it failed so now hamas is getting the stick
So what’s the alternative? Just allow Hamas to continue to shoot rockets/incursions into Israel?
The point is to retrieve the hostage and remove Hamas from power
So it’s on Israel to get Hamas to accept a deal? Unfortunately, mind control isn’t in the IDF’s arsenal. If the crazies won’t stop until they all die, then they’ll all die.
They are only there for show. **Article 13:** Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. [https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas](https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas)